Normally, I would say he isn't, because they have put out first screens that weren't the cover player, but considering how late it is in the summer, I have to agree that Lillard is most likely the cover athlete.

um, i guess im going to say it since i havent seen it said...Live is looking good, imo i think better than 2k15, and thats just honest. the face textures, the look of the players, the lightning effects, ima keep a closer eye on live this year! nba live was once beast mode from growing up on it through the years. ima say this, dont sleep on nba live 15 this year. drop some game-play so we can see the truth ea?

DANG!!! It would be awesome if EA would release Live for PC some time soon. Doesn't have to be Live 15. Don't have a PS4 anymore so it would be fun to try Live out one day. I see improvements in graphics. I've almost always loved the body of the players in Live and the accessories. With chances of the faces more accurate all that is important is the game modes and features. I can live with different gameplay than 2K.

mlp111 wrote:Didnt really take in how good EA skin textures and graphics looked until i saw this[ Image ][ Image ][ Image ]

Before I begin, let me just point out that I'm a 2K fan, and so my comments cannot be taken objectively. I think the main advantageo of 2K will be the gameplay. Live is prone to be more "arcade" and 2K more simulation, so even if the Live visuals are better I'll stick to 2K this year.

Having already said that, it's obvious that EA are making big steps in terms of catching up with 2K in several fields. Although I doubt that it will be a better game this year, it might pose serious competition to 2K in 2016. The biggest problem with 2K's graphics are the body textures. You can noitce that in the last pic comparison, just look at Lillard's right hand (the one not holding the ball).

QUICK EDIT: I also forgot to add that it is a bit unfair to compare Live 15 with 2K14, it should be Live 15 vs 2K15, and it is also unfair to compare the cover athlete with someone who is not a cover athlete for 2K. It's obvious the developers are going to give a little extra detail to their cover athlete. I'm sure if you compare 2K15's Durant with Live's Durant, 2K's will be much better than Live's...not sure about the body textures though.

And one last thing, I don't like Live's lighting / gamma on players. It looks a bit too bright, or too faded.

In the EA version you can see bones, veins, little details. In 2K's version you see something resembling rubber. There is too little detail in 2K's body textures and they should improve on that before 2K16.

centrifugal wrote:Live is prone to be more "arcade" and 2K more simulation, so even if the Live visuals are better I'll stick to 2K this year.

In my opinion, the only NBA Live release that's really leaned towards being an arcade game is NBA Live 2003. Most of the time, I'd say it's aimed to be sim, but simply fallen short of our expectations, or certain ideas just haven't panned out as well as one would have hoped. I suppose at the end of the day, it means the same thing: NBA Live hasn't yet become the sim experience that a lot of us would like to play, whereas 2K has delivered in that area.

NBA Live 14 wasn't particularly arcade-like. It is sim-oriented, but its gameplay suffers from stiff controls, and there were a lot of quirks with the animations. That's largely because they were re-using some assets and the approach to locomotion from NBA Live 13. Fortunately, they're discarding things like that moving forward, and making proper use of IGNITE.

Ideally, at some point there will be two viable alternatives for sim basketball fans. NBA Live still has a long way to go, but I'm encouraged by what I've heard about NBA Live 15 so far, as well as their future plans.

mlp111 wrote:Didnt really take in how good EA skin textures and graphics looked until i saw this[ Image ][ Image ][ Image ]

Before I begin, let me just point out that I'm a 2K fan, and so my comments cannot be taken objectively. I think the main advantageo of 2K will be the gameplay. Live is prone to be more "arcade" and 2K more simulation, so even if the Live visuals are better I'll stick to 2K this year.

Having already said that, it's obvious that EA are making big steps in terms of catching up with 2K in several fields. Although I doubt that it will be a better game this year, it might pose serious competition to 2K in 2016. The biggest problem with 2K's graphics are the body textures. You can noitce that in the last pic comparison, just look at Lillard's right hand (the one not holding the ball).

QUICK EDIT: I also forgot to add that it is a bit unfair to compare Live 15 with 2K14, it should be Live 15 vs 2K15, and it is also unfair to compare the cover athlete with someone who is not a cover athlete for 2K. It's obvious the developers are going to give a little extra detail to their cover athlete. I'm sure if you compare 2K15's Durant with Live's Durant, 2K's will be much better than Live's...not sure about the body textures though.

And one last thing, I don't like Live's lighting / gamma on players. It looks a bit too bright, or too faded.

In the EA version you can see bones, veins, little details. In 2K's version you see something resembling rubber. There is too little detail in 2K's body textures and they should improve on that before 2K16.

Yeah man I agree, I also know that its unfail to compare live 15 to 2k14. just wanted to show major graphic upgrade that EA has done. Some people say 2k14 graphics looked better than 2k15. But also, i noticed that certain players in 2k14 looked better than other. Like Lebron james, his textures are awesome, but Lillards arent. Maybe because lillard didnt get scanned. Like this yrs lillard, still doesnt even come close to EA version. However, gameplay is the deciding factor for me and many others. but its good to finally see EA look like a nextgen title.

2K15 seems very similar to 2K14 in terms of graphics though, at least in the builds that have been already shown. I have to say, I prefer Live's graphics this time 'round. It just looks much more natural and, in my opinion, just plain superior overall.

2K has always slacked on face models and courts. When next gen came out, it was obviously a giant step forward, something that we've never seen. But the shock and awe has just about worn off for me in terms of the graphics. Hopefully Live makes huge steps this year and dips into 2K sales a bit, which in turn maybe will get 2K to focus more on the aspects that they've always been lacking in. At the very least I hope Live's visuals get a lot of hype, because then 2K might actually start thinking about tweaking their models. The 2K art short comings were noticeable day one, but they got the pass overall because of the giant leap forward they made. Basically the obvious statement is the art whores need Live to do good, or we're at the mercy of 2K's art team and their gray hair patches, low res court textures, and very underwhelming player face models, even with scanning, which now we can say definitely thanks to Live.

JBulls wrote:2K15 seems very similar to 2K14 in terms of graphics though, at least in the builds that have been already shown. I have to say, I prefer Live's graphics this time 'round. It just looks much more natural and, in my opinion, just plain superior overall.

i have to agree with this.Dont get me wrong 2k's graphics are outstanding but i feel that this year that LIVE as really stepped up from the visual side.To me it looks like thee most realistic graphics i seen to date. there's just something about 2k15 models that reminds of 2k8 for the ps3/360. Iunno what it is.